What's the point in going to a 'new radio'. Is it claimed that this will be 'interference free?' (just like a 72 mhz transmitter with a berg was supposed to be interference free).

To me, it just seems like more expensive and not necessarily better.

I know folks have claimed that you don't have to worry about 'channels' like you do in the 72 mhz range. But I question how long that benefit will last, if 'everyone moves to it'.

Also, given that 2.4 ghz is largely consumer unregulated, anyone with a wireless access point could wipe out plane signals. (specially if they have a directional antenna, and possibly a linksys with new firmware to turn up the power).

And I've never seen where a Berg on 72 Mhz is "interference free". It is supposed to try to reject the bad signal, but at reduced response to the good signal until the the bad signal goes away. If the bad signal doesn't go away, the Berg will just quit responding.

Do a little reading on it here. You will see that it has lived up to its promise. Mine was glitch and hit free. Even when I tried to make it take a hit by having it near things that would have sent older radios into fits. Not a quiver or glitch. and I also flew it as high as I dared and still be able to see my planes. Nothing. No hits no glitches. Just smooth uninterutped control. Still it you are not having a problem with the older style then don't buy one. I can say that I will never buy a new radio that is not 2.4 ghz spread spectrum.
My only question at that time is will I be able to afford ( or need) the DX7 or should I buy another DX6?

Why would you be flying near a wireless access point in the first place???? At the club field, there is really nothing but brush and mountains ... That said, the all 2.4G must follow the FCC rules from the band. All must play together (or supposed too). Sure there may be exceptions but for the most part, this is not going to happen!

If everyone goes to it ... that would be a good thing.... At the club field the frequency board would be no more . Take Spektrum, has 80 channels available, two are used per person.... That makes 40 people could be flying in the range each Tx (under a mile) . Now how many fields do you go to that have 40 planes up at once in a square mile???? FWIW, We have at most 5..... Turned on at most 10. No that would be a good thing!

Still, I'll be flying my 72Mhz as I have the equipment. I don't see why one has to 'rush' and get the latest, just when you need a new radio --- go 2.4G. It's better. My DX6s are glitch free. It's been great. Also no running of antenna wire. Cool. I will not be buying any new 72Mhz radios again. No going back.

What's the point in going to a 'new radio'. Is it claimed that this will be 'interference free?' (just like a 72 mhz transmitter with a berg was supposed to be interference free).

To me, it just seems like more expensive and not necessarily better.

I know folks have claimed that you don't have to worry about 'channels' like you do in the 72 mhz range. But I question how long that benefit will last, if 'everyone moves to it'.

Also, given that 2.4 ghz is largely consumer unregulated, anyone with a wireless access point could wipe out plane signals. (specially if they have a directional antenna, and possibly a linksys with new firmware to turn up the power).

Expensive? Hardly. It's obvious you haven't tried one. Check out someones DX7, than you'll see what everyone except you and a few others are raving about. By the way, our flying field could hold 40 flyers at the same time, if we could find 40 that wanted to fly at the same time! Try that with the "old stuff".

Another good point about the Spektrum radio is that the rx is bound to that transmitter. So even if there is another transmitter on the same 2 freq ( extremely unlikely) then it still would only listen to the transmitter it was bound to.
Added security.
Wes

If you are already invested in quality 72 mHz gear that is working well for you and you fly with frequency control, then there is no need to change. For someone just starting out, it is no more expensive and has certain features that they may like.

For me the big draw is that flying in areas with no frequency control such as my neighborhood or local park, you never have to worry about being shot down by or shooting someone else on the same channel because the frequency board is built into the technology. You could never fly 72 mHz in such uncontrolled areas and have that same confidence. 72 mHz requires a club setting or remote area for full safety.

Any feed back on what the hobby dealers are selling/pushing? I can't imagine that any body buying a new system would invest money in a 72 system if they knew what was available.

I think it's a big yawn for Futaba. They are huge in industrial 2.4 gig spread systems. The model field doesnt produce enough income for them to care. It wouldn't be a surprise to me if 5 years from now it will be "What's a Futaba?"

One company is claiming they have a plug in module that will convert 72 transmitters to 2.4Gig. Talk's cheap however. I can claim I have a DIY circuit mod that will convert your present system including the receiver to 2.4 gig for under $50.

Sure is a major transition going on. I have several models under winter construction that need receivers. Do I just buy new 72 receivers or move to the 2.4Gig. Gut level tells me to junk the 72's. Nothing but trouble in my past experience.

I think the AMA might try to down play the 2.4G and may even try to outlaw it in fly ins or even club use. They will loose control of us if 2.4G takes over.

A friend ordered the new JR 7 channel FM just before the DX 7 came out. He is a bit upset since he was converting from Futaba and had to get new recivers anyhow. If he would have known he would have got the 2.4 system.

I'm using a Futaba 7 channel and have 5 micro and two full size FM Rxs ( so far ). It would be expensive to convert existing planes, but when my Futaba starts to get old in a year or two I'm looking forward to seeing what is out there in 2.4. Maybe a DX 9 someday ?

Why would you be flying near a wireless access point in the first place???? At the club field, there is really nothing but brush and mountains ... That said, the all 2.4G must follow the FCC rules from the band. All must play together (or supposed too). Sure there may be exceptions but for the most part, this is not going to happen!

I can see at least 2 directional antenna from my primary flying field. And 'for the most part' everyone drives 55 mph on the highway . . . , so I shouldn't worry about people not following FCC rules. Last time I 'war drove', I found a massive number of 2.4 GHZ access points up and down I-81.

But I can see the massive hostility in people when it is suggested that their financial expenditures may not be warranted . . . .

I was asking for what the benefit was, I haven't seen a large number of 2.4 fliers together, I've never seen more than a dozen RC fliers in a general area before. I don't see the benefit.

From this thread, I've only seen one person who posted that he's able to fly glitch free where he previously had glitches.

Since all my flying is done in a club environment I don't feel the need to dash out and buy another radio. There are places where 2.4GHZ makes perfect sense. Places that allow flying without formal frequency control are prime examples of such areas. Fields that maintain a viable frequency control system do not fit that profile.

If in the future I decide I need a new radio I will consider a spread spectrom radio.

Also keep in mind this is new technology that hasn't yet met the test of time. No one knows for certain yet how bullet proof this new stuff is. So far it seems to be working as expected but only time will tell if this is the solution or merely a step toward a solution.